ArticleBMC palliative care2019
Psychometric assessment of the Chinese version of the Problems and Needs in Palliative Care questionnaire-short version in advanced cancer patients.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The association between resilience and palliative care problems and needs in cancer patients: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Identifying palliative home care needs of patients with advanced cancer: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Translating and validating the gay affirmative practice scale for nurses in mainland China.Sexual medicine · 2024Article
- Symptom burden, palliative care knowledge, and palliative care needs in advanced gynecological cancer patients in Korea.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the oncology nurses health behaviors determinants scale: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- A Review on the Application of Hospice Care in Patients with Advanced Cancer.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Review
- Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of advance care planning self-efficacy scale among clinical nurses.BMC palliative care · 2022Article
- Prevalence and correlates of unmet palliative care needs in dyads of Chinese patients with advanced cancer and their informal caregivers: a cross-sectional survey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo determine the validity, reliability and acceptability of the Mandarin Chinese version of the Problems and Needs in Palliative Care questionnaire-short version (PNPC-sv) for measuring problems and palliative care needs among patients with advanced cancer.
methodsThis was a validation study using a forward- and backward- translation procedure, a panel of experts and a cross-sectional study design. The Mandarin Chinese version of the PNPC-sv was translated by four independent translators. The translated Chinese version was further reviewed by an expert panel to identify its content validity. A pilot test was conducted in 10 advanced cancer patients to preliminarily assess the face validity, readability and clarity of the pre-final version of the PNPC-sv. 178 patients with advanced cancer, regardless of their gender and types of cancer diagnosis, were further recruited through a convenience sampling from three tertiary hospitals in China to assess the psychometric properties of the PNPC-sv Mandarin Chinese version. Content validity was measured using the content validity index (CVI). Construct validity was estimated via confirmatory factor analysis and the contrasted groups approach. Concurrent validity was identified by analysing the correlations between the EORTC Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the PNPC-sv. Reliability of the PNPC-sv was examined with the internal consistency reliability and item-to-total correlations. Several closed-ended and open-ended questions were designed to explore its acceptability.
results174 patients completed the questionnaires. High content and face validity were determined after the two rounds of assessment with the expert panel and the patients. An excellent CVI of 1.0 was achieved and patients rated the PNPC-sv as a useful instrument for assessing their problems and needs (mean score = 7.99, 0-10 scale) and reported the items were not particularly sensitive and easy to understand. The majority of the fit indexes meet the critical criteria, with the Chi-square divided by degrees of freedom (x
conclusionsThe Mandarin Chinese version of the PNPC-sv is a valid, reliable and user-friendly instrument for measuring problems and palliative care needs among patients with advanced cancer. Further research is needed to further examine its psychometric properties particular internal structure in a larger patient sample.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.